Paradox Engine requires significant additional resources to be effective, and is incredibly easy to disrupt. While it can generate a powerful effect, more often than not it is 'win more'. Most decks should not even be playing it to begin with.
It is just another combo card, that can occasionally be used for general utility, and not a resilient one. This is a card that if you are having a problem with it, you honestly need to run more removal.
The significant resources it requires are "all the goodstuff artifact ramp and such you would be playing already in an artifact deck." Not exactly rocket surgery or anything. Play mana rocks play good artifacts == randomly win the game but take 3 weeks to do it.
How much instant speed artifact removal are you running in your decks? How much would you recommend?
If you're approaching this from a "card is not good in hypercompetitive spike EDH decks" then you're probably misunderstanding the complaints. Prophet of Kruphix was a bad spike card too and so was Sylvan Primordial.
If people are sick of reading about stuff just stop taking part. You have 100% control over what you read. Simic Ascendancy isn't going to get banned just because you didn't tell someone to shut up on the internet.
That is a gross simplification in my experience. "Trying to break it" in this case is running a couple extra mana rocks than normal, or a couple of mana dorks. I've yet to see a scenario in my own games that seemed outside the norm and into "Trying to break it".
My opinion of this card is starting to sour quite a lot and I'm definitely feeling the "you have to try to break it" excuse is no longer a valid excuse.
Scenario: First day opening the new Commander 2017 precons. We all did some slight upgrades to our decks, but nothing too crazy. Enter Inalla, Archmage Ritualist. The deck's pilot didn't add any extra mana rocks beyond a Chromatic Lantern. I can't remember the exact chain of plays that lead to the absurdity that followed Paradox Engine hitting the table, but let's just say he eventually managed to go infinite after a lot of drawing and clone creation resting solely on the shoulders of Paradox Engine. He ended up with Magus of the Mind and Bloodline Necromancer on the battlefield which with Paradox Engine was simply completely busted in combination with all the other cards he was getting.
I wish I could give you guys a more detailed description of how it went down, but the take away was that the rest of the players were feeling a little miffed that all he had to do was drop Paradox Engine to go into a 30 minute turn. The Inalla pilot himself admitted that he didn't expect it to go off like that, be just put it in because "It's good in everything". Before someone tries to make the argument: Yes, adding Ashnod's Altar and Wanderwine Prophet also makes infinite combos. Those require very specific cards to go off. Paradox Engine only needs card draw, which is plentiful. It completely breaks a game with very, very little. And that's the problem. The way most people build EDH decks, you don't have to try to break it for it to be completely busted. As Cryogen said, all you need is a few mana rocks. Any solid EDH deck with some card draw and mana rocks is going to get a stupid amount of value out of the card. I only have one copy in Breya one copy and put it in Breya, and I haven't gotten anymore because I've been anticipating it being banned for a year now and I'm completely shocked that it hasn't yet. I'm honestly baffled that the day I picked up my Prophet of Kruphix for Ezuri it got banned, but Paradox Engine is somehow still out there being completely degenerate.
Well I would hope you wouldn't have more than one copy in Breya...
I've said it before and I'll say it again, it's a card I was so disgusted with after the very first game I cast it that I refuse to put it in my decks anymore.
I'd also like to add that I've considered my existing decks and again the absurdity is real. The things it can enable in many of them is completely asinine, which is another reason I refuse to run it.
Daxos the Returned - I have a lot of bounce effects to keep playing Enchantments for more experience counters, so just putting Paradox out leads to ridiculousness and using his ability to pump out more and more and more spirits. It would be busted.
Hapatra, Vizier of Poisons - I run Cryptolith Rites in the deck because of how many Snakes and other misc tokens she can produce, in addition to any mana rocks, having a lot of card draw to draw into more spells, etc. I only run around 14 creatures because there's so much token production, so it goes without saying there's a metric crap ton of draw and spells to play to trigger Paradox Engine.
Selvala, Explorer Returned - Parley all day. I think anyone familiar with typical Selvala builds can imagine what Paradox Engine would do for a deck with her.
Breya, Etherium Shaper - As mentioned above, completely busted for what I hope are obvious reasons.
Sidisi, Brood Tyrant, Animar, Soul of Elements at least in my builds are both constantly casting or creating creatures on the board alongside creatures that tap for mana or untap other permanents and just having Paradox Engine on the board would lead to busted plays.
I have other decks but the point I'm trying to make is, I can throw this thing into any deck and it will completely unbalance the game and in many cases break it. These are just a few specific ways that if I just toss it into any deck I have that the deck and board state suddenly beccomes a silly amount better than it was the moment before I played it. Yes, people can say that about many good cards in the game, but how many of those cards can enable what this thing does by just throwing them into almost any deck? You play the card and in many cases, at least with any semi-experienced player, you're going to find ways to abuse it and get much, much more than 5 mana worth of value out of it. Talking with people in the stores I go to here in the Houston metro, and that's quite a few, the main reason it's not more prevalent here is so many people have been expecting it to get banned that they haven't wanted to buy a copy for every deck to turn around and see it banned a month or two later. Meanwhile the players who do play it admit that it's completely broken and they turn they play it the entire game shifts and goes on it's side. All you need is the usual stuff anyone puts in any EDH deck - mana and some card draw - and a chain reaction starts that is often leading to the end of that game.
I'd also like to add that I've considered my existing decks and again the absurdity is real. The things it can enable in many of them is completely asinine, which is another reason I refuse to run it.
...
Selvala, Explorer Returned - Parley all day. I think anyone familiar with typical Selvala builds can imagine what Paradox Engine would do for a deck with her.
...
I can, and she's not even my commander. The first time, I lucked into playing her infinitely before I dropped Elesh Norn, Grand Cenobite and Kamahl, Fist of Krosa for the win. The second time, I wasn't even thinking how degenerate she could be; I'd walloped someone a couple of times with Newlamog, and then started going infinite with Selvala. The guy thought I was trying to deck him out; I hadn't even thought of that possibility.
So yeah, I'm leaning towards it needing a banning myself, though I'm not 100% convinced. But I've had my fun, and it's not going in any other decks...too jank.
I just cut Paradox Engine from my Sen Triplets deck - a deck that plays eleven mana rocks, plus Metalworker. A deck where being able to untap everything has considerable value. Once, Paradox Engine allowed me to play my opponents entire hand. Every other time it either did nothing, or would have done nothing if I had drawn it.
Yes, it can be very strong. Most of the time however, it requires to much investment for to little gain, and is so easy to disrupt. It is vulnerable to a wide range of both reactive & proactive disruption. It requires an established board presence to work with, and cards to play to fuel it. If you do not have this support, it is a CMC5 artifact that does nothing.
Sen Triplets was the only deck I have made where it was even worth testing, and to my knowledge no one in my area uses the card now, because of how niche it is.
If you are having problems with the card, your group really does just need to play more removal, &/or get better. If for some reason that is not an option, just talk to your group about it. It is as easy to regulate on a local level as things like Armageddon, or any infinite combo.
If you are having problems with the card, your group really does just need to play more removal, &/or get better. If for some reason that is not an option, just talk to your group about it. It is as easy to regulate on a local level as things like Armageddon, or any infinite combo.
This is exactly the same thing people said about Prophet of Kruphix, a card I suspect you feel the exact same way about. Know your audience man.
Yeah, paradox engine is not very good if your goal is to combo out on turn 3 every game like a pro.
My issue with it is the same exact one as PoK - it creates a tedious, undesirable board state of one player taking a massive number of actions in comparison to others. The situation PoK had where the controller would take an extra virtual turn during each player's upkeep is fairly comparable.
Players end up durdling with 30 minute turns if people don't have removal for the engine right away.
I can tell from simply a glance at your decks that you're building hyper-optimized kill machines, and that's great, but you're coming from a perspective that probably cannot even grasp the mediocrity of most EDH decks.
My opinion on on if Prophet of Kruphix should have been banned or not is irrelevant to the discussion. The card is not comparable to Paradox Engine.
Prophet of Kruphix was of significant value to (nearly) any deck that could play it. Paradox Engine is of very little value outside very specific decks.
When Prophet resolved, the game commonly became centered on copying or stealing it. When Engine resolves, it is simply another threat, one that can even be ignored a lot of the time.
Oh, and if you think my decks are 'hyper-optimized killing machines', you have clearly never seen a deck actually optimized to win. In my area, it is rare that the combo player can even attempt to win before turn 7 or 8, and that is one of the more 'competitive' decks.
Yeah, paradox engine is not very good if your goal is to combo out on turn 3 every game like a pro.
Paradox Engine in Arcum Dagson is very good if your goal is to combo out on turn 3 every game like a pro.
Dox Engine is a decent card that shouldn't really be an issue unless you're playing crawwurm.dec with no removal. Any play that wins with it requires at least 7 mana in a single turn to pull off, if not more. That much mana should in fact be netting you a win or a huge swing in advantage.
Seriously guys, you're just making another variation of the dies to removal argument, with the extra rider that it has to be instant speed artifact removal (often that exiles or in combination with graveyard hate because of academy ruins // darksteel forge // sharuum // etc.).
How much instant speed artifact removal should people be playing in EDH do you think for a balanced meta?
Consecrated Sphinx works with this argument somewhat because at least creature interaction s prevalent in every section of the color pie (though of course green to a lesser extent).
Agreed on the unfortunate "dies to removal" type arguments. If you don't have a removal spell at the ready just sitting in your hand and it hits the table, the answer is to run removal? Does anyone play Magic where it works like that? That out of the 99 they always have a removal spell to answer every possible threat in their hand at all times and in a multiplayer format other opponents don't force their hand? I mean if that's the case why not unban Primeval Titan, Painter's Servant, Prophet of Kruphix and every other permanent on the list? They can be targeted with removal right? It's a piss poor argument that if you don't have an answer in your hand you're at fault when an extremely overpowered card creates a degenerate game state as soon as it resolves and is on the board, completely ignorant to the concerns being discussed.
Also, looking at the Stax-style Sen Triplets deck listed above in Muspellsheimr's signature, it is clearly a build that gains nothing from Paradox Engine because it does not benefit from chain casting spells as many do, so saying "This particular build gains nothing from this card" is not evidence in contrary of the concerns here that apply elsewhere, but an anecdote that is vastly irrelevant to the great majority of Paradox Engine's presence and power by just being inserted into many other decks; or the problematic game states out there that Paradox Engine is creating. Stating your opinion that a card isn't OP based solely on the fact that it has no place in one of your decks that clearly doesn't have much use for it's effect isn't evidence at all, nor does it serve a purpose in this discussion.
The other banned cards that you mentioned, except Painter's, can be easily slotted into any decks in their colors and do work. Paradox engine shouldn't be banned precisely because not every deck can support it.
And again, a player can spend around 7-8 mana uninterrupted, he should be winning anyways. If they're casting a Dox engine and it survives a whole round... That's on you, lol.
The other banned cards that you mentioned, except Painter's, can be easily slotted into any decks in their colors and do work. Paradox engine shouldn't be banned precisely because not every deck can support it.
And again, a player can spend around 7-8 mana uninterrupted, he should be winning anyways. If they're casting a Dox engine and it survives a whole round... That's on you, lol.
I can get 7 mana on the second turn using very commonly played edh cards. 2 lands, mana vault, mana crypt or sol ring, and you are there.
Not everyone wants to play the cut throat game where 7 mana worth of spells is supposed to end the game on the spot with a deterministic game win.
People already play Tooth and Nail, Omniscience, DEN, Craterhoof Behemoth, Insurrection, Sepulchral Primordial, Mikaeus x sac outlet x ballista. This is just more of the same. At worst it does absolutely nothing, normally it reduces your spells by X, where X is the amount of mana you can produce from non-land sources, and at best it can carry your deck to victory. If you don't like it cut it from your deck (like how someone else said they did above), talk to the person using it, or answer it or the cards it needs to win.
Also with that example of yours, if you actually drew a god hand like that, because thats 4 cards + the dox engine + something that you can chain to win, you honestly deserve to win, lol.
The difference between 7 and 11 mana is quite a lot. We've been over and over this in other threads but in general it's 10+ mana cards that "win the game" and not all of those do.
Paradox engine essentially does what Omniscience does at 5 mana; that's my issue with it. You play some mana rocks or dorks and then all your spells are free (essentially). And unlike Omniscience, it can fuel X spells and activated abilities, so in many ways it's more powerful.
Paradox engine is a card that at 5 mana can easily turn into 20+ mana. Even just a couple of cantrips can win the game there. Two 2+ mana rocks and a ponder is often enough to win the game.
I don't think you deserve to win by playing mana rocks, a 5 mana spell, and then drawing literally any draw spell or tutor or outlet. There's no card quite like it.
The issue is at the core the same issue PoK had: Action Economy
Most "game winners" at 5-6 mana are cards like consecrated sphinx that are vulnerable and require letting other people play their turns.
Paradox Engine allows you to functionally take multiple mini-turns over and over again, taking far more actions than other players. Yes, there is a deckbuilding constraint but it's fairly modest -- play good mana rocks or mana dorks, which every deck is doing anyway.
I just have problems with the whole "Paradox Engine is a 5 mana omniscience" comparison because that it isn't. Omniscience is only a bad card if you're empty handed, any other time it's going to be great. Paradox Engine is useless with empty hands as well, but also if you don't have enough non-land mana sources you can immediately tap as well. It needs more setup - yes, not a LOT of setup, but more setup nonetheless.
I also think a lot of people here are overestimating the general kitchen table EDH player. We, on this forum, are more involved compared to most EDH players who'll never bother going on here or Reddit or anything to brush up their EDH knowledge. I've seen a lot of new folks at my LGS (And it's a reasonably high powered LGS) who just didn't bother with mana rocks or dorks. Land-ramp, sure, but there the engine doesn't do much either.
As for my own decks, my only deck that actively abuses the engine is Selvala, Explorer Returned, and yes in that deck it's a matter of play Engine -> Win. However, that deck also runs Umbral Mantle-ish wincons and various others, so the Engine isn't even the first thing I tend to go for when I get to tutor. In all my other decks, I'm struggling to see how it'd be better than most other cards. Take Edgar Markov for example. It does run enough mana rocks to be worth the effort at first glance. It just doesn't allow me to chain into combos or massive card draw, which are required in order to make Paradox Engine go from "Just okay" to "OMG broken". A deck needs a bit more than just "A high amount of dorks/mana rocks" to break the Engine, in short.
Having said that, the Engine can indeed cause some insanely long and boring turns. But how is that any different from Elves decks playing Glimpse of Nature or something like that?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Commander decks:
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
While working on further iterations of my Inalla, Archmage Ritualist deck this week, I decided to switch Paradox Engine into her and see what would happen. Being a three color deck, I run a lot of mana rocks. Most three color decks do, so I wanted to see what would happen. I don't run the Wanderwine Prophet combo, though I do have Ashnod's Altar + Bloodline Necromancer.
As of last night, I've won four games off of Paradox Engine alone the same turn it resolved without even having a clear plan as to what I was going to do with it any of those times. It wasn't even using the combo listed above. I was able to just keep casting spells until I had next to no library and just find a way to win with all the spells and abilities I was chain casting. If I put this in many of the decks I mentioned before, it'd essentially be the same result. My Inalla deck has won without Paradox Engine several times, but all of those wins were hard fought and took a lot of planning. And that's the problem with it. I haven't put a list up yet (I can if needed), but I assure you it needs a lot of work. People keep using examples for decks where it doesn't have the potential to cause problems as an argument against banning Paradox Engine, and I feel the flaw with these arguments is that they're not the problem. The problem is the vast amount of decks that can and will become degenerate just from it being there. Aggro or Stax decks will very obviously not have anything to do with the thing because they want to do the opposite of chain cast spells, or win through combat. That's very obvious. The lack of a problem in one place does not mean the problem is not serious in a lot of other places.
The problem is that at least in my metas, when we do FNM or even just play casually, hardly anyone is playing the decks that everyone is saying "Oh well this doesn't do anything for that". Most EDH players I play with are playing high synergy decks that often run combos, a lot of mana rocks and card draw. I'd even go as far as to say that most EDH players I communicate with on a regular basis would run those. All you need is a deck with synergy. And the argument that less popular deck archetypes in the format don't get use out of it isn't much of an argument. Why? Because the format is usually played with 4+ players. It takes one player playing Paradox Engine to cast it and completely muck up the game, or outright win. The argument doesn't hold water when the Edgar Markov player is one player in a pod of three, and two or three other plays are playing it or playing decks that become abusive with it and it's basically just a race to who gets Paradox Engine first.
I also disagree with the argument about kitchen Magic players that don't look at these forums etc. To say those players are oblivious to much of the online community and issues we see is to also suggest they're also probably not even aware of the banned list. That makes any debate about what should or shouldn't be banned moot. If a player is aware enough to know about the banned list we're talking about, they're likely aware enough to hear or see people talking about certain cards. And again, the issue comes down to when people do play it, not when they aren't. There seems to be a bit of a "see the forest from the trees" problem here.
Paradox engine essentially does what Omniscience does at 5 mana; that's my issue with it. You play some mana rocks or dorks and then all your spells are free (essentially).
So with tons of support you can play it in T5 and play everything for free.
How exactly is it different? If you have the mana-rocks to abuse Paradox at turn 5 you will also have the mana-rocks to play Omniscience at T5.
The only real difference is that one is mono-green while the other can go in any deck.
Turn 5? Yes, those decks are known for playing their spells on curve C'mon. Do you think that type of argument fools anyone?
I'm guessing you would defend tooth and nail by saying "well turn 9 win the game seems okay!"
It's not like 'playing all the good mana rocks' is a serious cost in EDH. I've seen t2 and t3 paradox engines on a fairly regular basis and it ends the game most of the time, and even when answered it's so easy to recur as to be comical. There's even a general specifically geared to enable this.
This sort of line of argument is pretty funny, kind of like the old "Prophet of Kruphix decks had to play a bunch of ETB value creatures everyone was already playing anyway to really take advantage of it, so it was totally fair" and "Primeval titan decks had to play all the really good lands to take advantage of it."
Aggro or Stax decks will very obviously not have anything to do with the thing because they want to do the opposite of chain cast spells, or win through combat. That's very obvious. The lack of a problem in one place does not mean the problem is not serious in a lot of other places.
I wanted to address this point.
Paradox engine + static orb or winter orb or stasis == pretty ridiculous soft lock (even with just a rock or two it's usually enough to be an insurmountable advantage).
Been on the receiving end of this one a few times now and frankly it's the worst part of the card. Worse even than people taking 20 minute turns storming off.
I also think a lot of people here are overestimating the general kitchen table EDH player. We, on this forum, are more involved compared to most EDH players who'll never bother going on here or Reddit or anything to brush up their EDH knowledge. I've seen a lot of new folks at my LGS (And it's a reasonably high powered LGS) who just didn't bother with mana rocks or dorks. Land-ramp, sure, but there the engine doesn't do much either.
You can't balance the format around what you think the people that don't give feedback are doing/feeling. I really dislike this go-to I keep seeing in defense of cards. It is basically "most players are too dumb to realize how good a card can be." I don't have a huge issue with Paradox Engine, but this is the kind of reasoning that keeps format-warping cards in a problematic position.
Turn 5? Yes, those decks are known for playing their spells on curve C'mon. Do you think that type of argument fools anyone?
I'm guessing you would defend tooth and nail by saying "well turn 9 win the game seems okay!"
It's not like 'playing all the good mana rocks' is a serious cost in EDH. I've seen t2 and t3 paradox engines on a fairly regular basis and it ends the game most of the time, and even when answered it's so easy to recur as to be comical. There's even a general specifically geared to enable this.
This sort of line of argument is pretty funny, kind of like the old "Prophet of Kruphix decks had to play a bunch of ETB value creatures everyone was already playing anyway to really take advantage of it, so it was totally fair" and "Primeval titan decks had to play all the really good lands to take advantage of it."
I defend Tooth and Nail by saying that if I want to win by combo I have easier ways to achieve that; there is nothing wrong with throwing two creatures into play. If you cannot handle two creatures you should re-evaluate your deckbuilding.
All those arguments work the same for Omniscience, and that card has never been an issue in EDH.
Kruphix wasn't banned because of ETB-creatures and Primeval Titan wasn't banned because it tutored two good lands.
Titan was banned because it got played, tutored two lands into play, got cloned, killed, stolen, ressurected and then cloned again.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
It is just another combo card, that can occasionally be used for general utility, and not a resilient one. This is a card that if you are having a problem with it, you honestly need to run more removal.
A Dying Wish
To Rise Again
Chainer, Dementia Master
Muldrotha, the Gravetide
Atraxa, Praetors' Voice
How much instant speed artifact removal are you running in your decks? How much would you recommend?
If you're approaching this from a "card is not good in hypercompetitive spike EDH decks" then you're probably misunderstanding the complaints. Prophet of Kruphix was a bad spike card too and so was Sylvan Primordial.
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
Sure you can break it, but most of the time its just value unless you TRY and break it.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
Scenario: First day opening the new Commander 2017 precons. We all did some slight upgrades to our decks, but nothing too crazy. Enter Inalla, Archmage Ritualist. The deck's pilot didn't add any extra mana rocks beyond a Chromatic Lantern. I can't remember the exact chain of plays that lead to the absurdity that followed Paradox Engine hitting the table, but let's just say he eventually managed to go infinite after a lot of drawing and clone creation resting solely on the shoulders of Paradox Engine. He ended up with Magus of the Mind and Bloodline Necromancer on the battlefield which with Paradox Engine was simply completely busted in combination with all the other cards he was getting.
I wish I could give you guys a more detailed description of how it went down, but the take away was that the rest of the players were feeling a little miffed that all he had to do was drop Paradox Engine to go into a 30 minute turn. The Inalla pilot himself admitted that he didn't expect it to go off like that, be just put it in because "It's good in everything". Before someone tries to make the argument: Yes, adding Ashnod's Altar and Wanderwine Prophet also makes infinite combos. Those require very specific cards to go off. Paradox Engine only needs card draw, which is plentiful. It completely breaks a game with very, very little. And that's the problem. The way most people build EDH decks, you don't have to try to break it for it to be completely busted. As Cryogen said, all you need is a few mana rocks. Any solid EDH deck with some card draw and mana rocks is going to get a stupid amount of value out of the card. I only have
one copy in Breyaone copy and put it in Breya, and I haven't gotten anymore because I've been anticipating it being banned for a year now and I'm completely shocked that it hasn't yet. I'm honestly baffled that the day I picked up my Prophet of Kruphix for Ezuri it got banned, but Paradox Engine is somehow still out there being completely degenerate.(Also known as Xenphire)
I've said it before and I'll say it again, it's a card I was so disgusted with after the very first game I cast it that I refuse to put it in my decks anymore.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
I'd also like to add that I've considered my existing decks and again the absurdity is real. The things it can enable in many of them is completely asinine, which is another reason I refuse to run it.
Daxos the Returned - I have a lot of bounce effects to keep playing Enchantments for more experience counters, so just putting Paradox out leads to ridiculousness and using his ability to pump out more and more and more spirits. It would be busted.
Hapatra, Vizier of Poisons - I run Cryptolith Rites in the deck because of how many Snakes and other misc tokens she can produce, in addition to any mana rocks, having a lot of card draw to draw into more spells, etc. I only run around 14 creatures because there's so much token production, so it goes without saying there's a metric crap ton of draw and spells to play to trigger Paradox Engine.
Selvala, Explorer Returned - Parley all day. I think anyone familiar with typical Selvala builds can imagine what Paradox Engine would do for a deck with her.
Breya, Etherium Shaper - As mentioned above, completely busted for what I hope are obvious reasons.
Jhoira of the Ghitu - Some pretty awful/absurd things could be done here, especially with Jhoira's Timebug, etc.
Sidisi, Brood Tyrant, Animar, Soul of Elements at least in my builds are both constantly casting or creating creatures on the board alongside creatures that tap for mana or untap other permanents and just having Paradox Engine on the board would lead to busted plays.
I have other decks but the point I'm trying to make is, I can throw this thing into any deck and it will completely unbalance the game and in many cases break it. These are just a few specific ways that if I just toss it into any deck I have that the deck and board state suddenly beccomes a silly amount better than it was the moment before I played it. Yes, people can say that about many good cards in the game, but how many of those cards can enable what this thing does by just throwing them into almost any deck? You play the card and in many cases, at least with any semi-experienced player, you're going to find ways to abuse it and get much, much more than 5 mana worth of value out of it. Talking with people in the stores I go to here in the Houston metro, and that's quite a few, the main reason it's not more prevalent here is so many people have been expecting it to get banned that they haven't wanted to buy a copy for every deck to turn around and see it banned a month or two later. Meanwhile the players who do play it admit that it's completely broken and they turn they play it the entire game shifts and goes on it's side. All you need is the usual stuff anyone puts in any EDH deck - mana and some card draw - and a chain reaction starts that is often leading to the end of that game.
(Also known as Xenphire)
I can, and she's not even my commander. The first time, I lucked into playing her infinitely before I dropped Elesh Norn, Grand Cenobite and Kamahl, Fist of Krosa for the win. The second time, I wasn't even thinking how degenerate she could be; I'd walloped someone a couple of times with Newlamog, and then started going infinite with Selvala. The guy thought I was trying to deck him out; I hadn't even thought of that possibility.
So yeah, I'm leaning towards it needing a banning myself, though I'm not 100% convinced. But I've had my fun, and it's not going in any other decks...too jank.
EDH decks: 1. RGWMayael's Big BeatsRETIRED!
2. BUWMerieke Ri Berit and the 40 Thieves
3. URNiv's Wheeling and Dealing!
4. BURThe Walking Dead
5. GWSisay's Legends of Tomorrow
6. RWBRise of Markov
7. GElvez and stuffz(W)
8. RCrush your enemies(W)
9. BSign right here...(W)
Once, Paradox Engine allowed me to play my opponents entire hand. Every other time it either did nothing, or would have done nothing if I had drawn it.
Yes, it can be very strong. Most of the time however, it requires to much investment for to little gain, and is so easy to disrupt. It is vulnerable to a wide range of both reactive & proactive disruption. It requires an established board presence to work with, and cards to play to fuel it. If you do not have this support, it is a CMC5 artifact that does nothing.
Sen Triplets was the only deck I have made where it was even worth testing, and to my knowledge no one in my area uses the card now, because of how niche it is.
If you are having problems with the card, your group really does just need to play more removal, &/or get better. If for some reason that is not an option, just talk to your group about it. It is as easy to regulate on a local level as things like Armageddon, or any infinite combo.
A Dying Wish
To Rise Again
Chainer, Dementia Master
Muldrotha, the Gravetide
Atraxa, Praetors' Voice
This is exactly the same thing people said about Prophet of Kruphix, a card I suspect you feel the exact same way about. Know your audience man.
Yeah, paradox engine is not very good if your goal is to combo out on turn 3 every game like a pro.
My issue with it is the same exact one as PoK - it creates a tedious, undesirable board state of one player taking a massive number of actions in comparison to others. The situation PoK had where the controller would take an extra virtual turn during each player's upkeep is fairly comparable.
Players end up durdling with 30 minute turns if people don't have removal for the engine right away.
I can tell from simply a glance at your decks that you're building hyper-optimized kill machines, and that's great, but you're coming from a perspective that probably cannot even grasp the mediocrity of most EDH decks.
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
Prophet of Kruphix was of significant value to (nearly) any deck that could play it. Paradox Engine is of very little value outside very specific decks.
When Prophet resolved, the game commonly became centered on copying or stealing it. When Engine resolves, it is simply another threat, one that can even be ignored a lot of the time.
Oh, and if you think my decks are 'hyper-optimized killing machines', you have clearly never seen a deck actually optimized to win. In my area, it is rare that the combo player can even attempt to win before turn 7 or 8, and that is one of the more 'competitive' decks.
A Dying Wish
To Rise Again
Chainer, Dementia Master
Muldrotha, the Gravetide
Atraxa, Praetors' Voice
Paradox Engine in Arcum Dagson is very good if your goal is to combo out on turn 3 every game like a pro.
Dox Engine is a decent card that shouldn't really be an issue unless you're playing crawwurm.dec with no removal. Any play that wins with it requires at least 7 mana in a single turn to pull off, if not more. That much mana should in fact be netting you a win or a huge swing in advantage.
How much instant speed artifact removal should people be playing in EDH do you think for a balanced meta?
Consecrated Sphinx works with this argument somewhat because at least creature interaction s prevalent in every section of the color pie (though of course green to a lesser extent).
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
Also, looking at the Stax-style Sen Triplets deck listed above in Muspellsheimr's signature, it is clearly a build that gains nothing from Paradox Engine because it does not benefit from chain casting spells as many do, so saying "This particular build gains nothing from this card" is not evidence in contrary of the concerns here that apply elsewhere, but an anecdote that is vastly irrelevant to the great majority of Paradox Engine's presence and power by just being inserted into many other decks; or the problematic game states out there that Paradox Engine is creating. Stating your opinion that a card isn't OP based solely on the fact that it has no place in one of your decks that clearly doesn't have much use for it's effect isn't evidence at all, nor does it serve a purpose in this discussion.
(Also known as Xenphire)
And again, a player can spend around 7-8 mana uninterrupted, he should be winning anyways. If they're casting a Dox engine and it survives a whole round... That's on you, lol.
I can get 7 mana on the second turn using very commonly played edh cards. 2 lands, mana vault, mana crypt or sol ring, and you are there.
Not everyone wants to play the cut throat game where 7 mana worth of spells is supposed to end the game on the spot with a deterministic game win.
Also with that example of yours, if you actually drew a god hand like that, because thats 4 cards + the dox engine + something that you can chain to win, you honestly deserve to win, lol.
Paradox engine essentially does what Omniscience does at 5 mana; that's my issue with it. You play some mana rocks or dorks and then all your spells are free (essentially). And unlike Omniscience, it can fuel X spells and activated abilities, so in many ways it's more powerful.
Paradox engine is a card that at 5 mana can easily turn into 20+ mana. Even just a couple of cantrips can win the game there. Two 2+ mana rocks and a ponder is often enough to win the game.
I don't think you deserve to win by playing mana rocks, a 5 mana spell, and then drawing literally any draw spell or tutor or outlet. There's no card quite like it.
The issue is at the core the same issue PoK had: Action Economy
Most "game winners" at 5-6 mana are cards like consecrated sphinx that are vulnerable and require letting other people play their turns.
Paradox Engine allows you to functionally take multiple mini-turns over and over again, taking far more actions than other players. Yes, there is a deckbuilding constraint but it's fairly modest -- play good mana rocks or mana dorks, which every deck is doing anyway.
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
I also think a lot of people here are overestimating the general kitchen table EDH player. We, on this forum, are more involved compared to most EDH players who'll never bother going on here or Reddit or anything to brush up their EDH knowledge. I've seen a lot of new folks at my LGS (And it's a reasonably high powered LGS) who just didn't bother with mana rocks or dorks. Land-ramp, sure, but there the engine doesn't do much either.
As for my own decks, my only deck that actively abuses the engine is Selvala, Explorer Returned, and yes in that deck it's a matter of play Engine -> Win. However, that deck also runs Umbral Mantle-ish wincons and various others, so the Engine isn't even the first thing I tend to go for when I get to tutor. In all my other decks, I'm struggling to see how it'd be better than most other cards. Take Edgar Markov for example. It does run enough mana rocks to be worth the effort at first glance. It just doesn't allow me to chain into combos or massive card draw, which are required in order to make Paradox Engine go from "Just okay" to "OMG broken". A deck needs a bit more than just "A high amount of dorks/mana rocks" to break the Engine, in short.
Having said that, the Engine can indeed cause some insanely long and boring turns. But how is that any different from Elves decks playing Glimpse of Nature or something like that?
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
As of last night, I've won four games off of Paradox Engine alone the same turn it resolved without even having a clear plan as to what I was going to do with it any of those times. It wasn't even using the combo listed above. I was able to just keep casting spells until I had next to no library and just find a way to win with all the spells and abilities I was chain casting. If I put this in many of the decks I mentioned before, it'd essentially be the same result. My Inalla deck has won without Paradox Engine several times, but all of those wins were hard fought and took a lot of planning. And that's the problem with it. I haven't put a list up yet (I can if needed), but I assure you it needs a lot of work. People keep using examples for decks where it doesn't have the potential to cause problems as an argument against banning Paradox Engine, and I feel the flaw with these arguments is that they're not the problem. The problem is the vast amount of decks that can and will become degenerate just from it being there. Aggro or Stax decks will very obviously not have anything to do with the thing because they want to do the opposite of chain cast spells, or win through combat. That's very obvious. The lack of a problem in one place does not mean the problem is not serious in a lot of other places.
The problem is that at least in my metas, when we do FNM or even just play casually, hardly anyone is playing the decks that everyone is saying "Oh well this doesn't do anything for that". Most EDH players I play with are playing high synergy decks that often run combos, a lot of mana rocks and card draw. I'd even go as far as to say that most EDH players I communicate with on a regular basis would run those. All you need is a deck with synergy. And the argument that less popular deck archetypes in the format don't get use out of it isn't much of an argument. Why? Because the format is usually played with 4+ players. It takes one player playing Paradox Engine to cast it and completely muck up the game, or outright win. The argument doesn't hold water when the Edgar Markov player is one player in a pod of three, and two or three other plays are playing it or playing decks that become abusive with it and it's basically just a race to who gets Paradox Engine first.
I also disagree with the argument about kitchen Magic players that don't look at these forums etc. To say those players are oblivious to much of the online community and issues we see is to also suggest they're also probably not even aware of the banned list. That makes any debate about what should or shouldn't be banned moot. If a player is aware enough to know about the banned list we're talking about, they're likely aware enough to hear or see people talking about certain cards. And again, the issue comes down to when people do play it, not when they aren't. There seems to be a bit of a "see the forest from the trees" problem here.
(Also known as Xenphire)
So with tons of support you can play it in T5 and play everything for free.
How exactly is it different? If you have the mana-rocks to abuse Paradox at turn 5 you will also have the mana-rocks to play Omniscience at T5.
The only real difference is that one is mono-green while the other can go in any deck.
I'm guessing you would defend tooth and nail by saying "well turn 9 win the game seems okay!"
It's not like 'playing all the good mana rocks' is a serious cost in EDH. I've seen t2 and t3 paradox engines on a fairly regular basis and it ends the game most of the time, and even when answered it's so easy to recur as to be comical. There's even a general specifically geared to enable this.
This sort of line of argument is pretty funny, kind of like the old "Prophet of Kruphix decks had to play a bunch of ETB value creatures everyone was already playing anyway to really take advantage of it, so it was totally fair" and "Primeval titan decks had to play all the really good lands to take advantage of it."
I wanted to address this point.
Paradox engine + static orb or winter orb or stasis == pretty ridiculous soft lock (even with just a rock or two it's usually enough to be an insurmountable advantage).
Been on the receiving end of this one a few times now and frankly it's the worst part of the card. Worse even than people taking 20 minute turns storming off.
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
You can't balance the format around what you think the people that don't give feedback are doing/feeling. I really dislike this go-to I keep seeing in defense of cards. It is basically "most players are too dumb to realize how good a card can be." I don't have a huge issue with Paradox Engine, but this is the kind of reasoning that keeps format-warping cards in a problematic position.
All those arguments work the same for Omniscience, and that card has never been an issue in EDH.
Kruphix wasn't banned because of ETB-creatures and Primeval Titan wasn't banned because it tutored two good lands.
Titan was banned because it got played, tutored two lands into play, got cloned, killed, stolen, ressurected and then cloned again.